Looking for design inspiration?   Browse our curated collections!

Return to Main Discussion Page
Discussion Quote Icon

Discussion

Main Menu | Search Discussions

Search Discussions
 
 

Joe Burgess

8 Years Ago

The Purist

This painting is 100% acrylic.
When my mother-in-law looked at it, she suggested that it looks like I used some pastel, as if that made it less pure.
There's a guy whose work I've seen online. I like his style. He works in a combination of acrylic, graphite and colored pencil.

I'm not aware of any "old masters" who worked in mixed media.
I'm certainly not educated in such things.

Are you a purist when it comes to art?
Is a piece of art tainted if it can't be completed in a single medium?
Is it a factor to the so-called "gate keepers" who decide what has value?
Will it matter to future scholars who critique this generation of traditional artists?

What do you think?

Joe Burgess
J.B. Imagery

Reply Order

Post Reply
 

Yes, I'm a purist.

I purely believe that art is art -- despite any underlying pedigree . . . or lack of such. ;-)

 

Mike Savad

8 Years Ago

depends how you define purist. i consider my stuff pure art. beyond that there is no such thing depending how you define it.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

 

David King

8 Years Ago

No, I'm not a purist. Whatever it takes to end up with the image you intend is what it takes. I knew a guy that was adamant that using a pencil lay-in on a pen/ink drawing made it mixed media, whatever. People and their hangups. I have no idea what the gatekeepers and scholars think and frankly don't care, in fact I think art made to please them is what isn't pure.

 

Brian Wallace

8 Years Ago

I don't pay attention to such notions and in your case, nothing was said directly about it. It seems it's more of your own speculation from what was said without confirmation about what was meant.

What matters IMHO, is whether what you do artistically is original. In other words, you can mix mud and water if you want... It's yours, and others can either admire it or ignore it. There was always "the one" who did something for the first time, and if it was something others wanted to emulate, then the originator should have the credit for coming up with it. You may be laughed at or you may be called "Genius". Either way, the risk is up to you. My personal advice (for what it's worth), is not to care what others think, or what you THINK others think.

 

Joel Bruce Wallach

8 Years Ago

"Are you a purist when it comes to art? "
-- Yes, because I'm purely an artist.

"Is a piece of art tainted if it can't be completed in a single medium?"
-- Art isn't tainted, because it has its own intrinsic purity. To question art because it is, or is not, in a particular medium is a distortion of perception, and that distortion is what is tainted.

"Is it a factor to the so-called "gate keepers" who decide what has value?"
-- Such gatekeepers are only named as gatekeepers by those who give them power. Look beyond their limited thinking, and do not give your power away.

"Will it matter to future scholars who critique this generation of traditional artists?"
-- It won't matter to those scholars who are genuinely interested in art. It will only matter to those who are mired in pettiness, and you need not consider the small-minded opinions of such critics.

 

Marlene Burns

8 Years Ago

I am a mixed media artist. I stArt with molding paste, gesso, then Airbrush inks right out if the bottle
When that dries, acrylic and metallic paint is Next.
Metal, plastic, wood, handmade paper is last

The more the merrier.
Is purity in art a virtue????

 

Jim Whalen

8 Years Ago

I approach art the way I approach cooking; with a mix of creative and experimental energy and unafraid to try new things and seldom sticking to a recipe, but always drawing upon past knowledge and success. Not everything I cook is worth serving to guests, and not everything I paint is worth showing to the public. However, I believe that nothing great is ever accomplished with out some trial and error and certainly nothing new would ever be created without this approach. So, obviously, I don't much care what the gatekeepers and academics believe.

 

Shirley Sykes Bracken

8 Years Ago

I tell my daughter to be sure I have crayons in the nursing home or you know what I'll use instead.

Art can be made from ANYTHING or combination of anything.

If you try to fit into a Classical form of art, you box yourself in, you have to do it the way you are told!

 

Being a "purist" seems to involve snobbish attitudes a great deal. I understand this to a degree. Those who have taken the time to learn the rules have a hard time when they are broken by some upstart who ignores the "Caution" signs.

The other day I was having this discussion with a gentleman who was parsing some differences in the final product of digital photography and old school film photography. He pointed to the digital photograph and how he could tell that it had been saturated. He pointed to the film photograph and how it seemed so much more natural. I could hardly notice any differences. Spending much time on FAA viewing over saturated images made these look pale. Not that it really mattered. Digital photography is just a starting point for the digital playground today. A staunch purist doesn't seem to want to understand this point.

Progress does not show itself until the can is opened.

 

Mark Blauhoefer

8 Years Ago

I'd say I tend to be more concerned with the speed of deterioration of materials, that is if a part of the painting fades, flakes, peels off, or crumbles before the rest of it, it bothers me. So I'm a purist in the consistency of what it's made of.

With pastels I always think they're going to melt on a hot day, with pencil I feel that the paper is going to yellow and molder (personal ordeal may play a role in this)

So a quality canvas with a titaniun white acrylic gesso, and topped by lightfast acrylics, and an acrylic varnish

 

Yikes -- Shirley! :-) :-)

 

Rick Mosher

8 Years Ago

To the artist who is a purist, it matters. To an artist who loves experimentation and developing new processes it doesn't matter at all. So both are correct. The same applies to collectors of art I would imagine. To collectors of "purist" art, it would matter. I will mix any medium in any way I can think of. It makes me happy and that is all I care about. I am sure working with a "pure" medium makes the purist artist just as happy as me.

 

CHERYL EMERSON ADAMS

8 Years Ago

Context is everything.
Sometimes it matters what materials you use - and what materials you use / don't use with it.

Materials can matter when durability or other practical considerations matter. Materials can matter if you're trying to stick to a pre-defined genre. Materials can matter if you're entering a contest or a show where someone else has defined the parameters.

What's great about art is you can decide how "purist" you want to be in any particular genre, and as long as you don't misrepresent what you're doing, you're good.

 

Drew

8 Years Ago

the lattest confirmed da vinci was done with mixed media

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portrait_of_a_Young_Fianc%C3%A9e

 

Fine art Gallery

8 Years Ago

If you try to fit into a Classical form of art, you box yourself in, you have to do it the way you are told!
Agree with Shirly,
One thing good about being an Artist is that you don't limit yourself. It is a free spirit. Free as a bird. Do whatever your heart desire.
I understand the concept of learning old things. But it's important not to limit yourself to things that you learned. You know what people say, If you study the history then you can predict the future not only that you are more likely to succeed in the future. Grounded in the fundamental concept of Art is important for that reason.
Experiment, learn, take chances, see what happens, these are important quality of an Artist IMO

My box is big, but it only takes little joy to fill it.
I like to do my own little thing and that is plenty for me. What other people say or do has very little effect on my large box.
I don't have a choice to be anything other than that. I felt I was born that way.

 

Roger Swezey

8 Years Ago

Anything goes....As long you don't claim something is.. what it's not

 

Jani Freimann

8 Years Ago

Edit: I consider myself somewhat of a purist in art, but I do and love mixed media. It's not purism that is judging art. It is lack of education. Times are changing. Do a lot of people call stuff non-art because it doesn't fit in a familiar category? Yes. I'm particular about what I think is art, but it is also a broad scope at the same time. Just not all inclusive. I don't think throwing up onto a canvas should be called art. Glorifying something that is a sickness is bad form. I don't think peeing in a jar, dropping a crucifix in it and photographing it should be called art either.

Hitler was an evil man, but you don't see people dressing up as him for Halloween. I know that's a giant leap, but my point is: there should be some limitation, some sort of boundary so art remains special. With that said...I am not a great enough person to be the one to set that limit or tell someone what they are doing isn't art and, within reason, I don't want to limit myself either. I guess what I'm also saying is that our convictions are our own and should not be placed onto others unless laws are being broken.

For the most part, this is what I think...

The disease: It's an uneducated person and/or a closed-minded person who thinks art can only be done one way - their way or to their own liking.
The cure: Look at lots of art from all medias; study it; see the skill, or the lack thereof; look at more and more and more art; and listen to what the artist is saying, trying to say or try to figure it out for yourself. It takes studying thousands upon thousands of images from all medias to become an expert. It may even take forever...or at least until we die.

In the meantime, be kind and thoughtful in what you say to the artist because many times your words go straight to their heart. Not all artists have arrived at the ability to compartmentalize or learn from the good, the bad, and the ugly critiques.
~ Jani

 

Jani Freimann

8 Years Ago

Hyoye ~ "My box is big, but it only takes little joy to fill it."

Great attitude.

 

Fine art Gallery

8 Years Ago

Thanks! Jani

 

Kevin OConnell

8 Years Ago

As far as a purist, I don't think I am but many say I am. I really don't care though. When I think of a certain image I want to portray, I study how to do it with my camera and the available lighting and conditions i will have to deal with. I don't depend on software after the image is taken to make it look a certain way.

I do it this way because I enjoy it, not because I want to be called a purist.

I also can use photoshop quite well if I want, but choose to do most of my work in a purist form.

 

Drew

8 Years Ago

is mixing traditional with digital mixed media?

 

Joe Burgess

8 Years Ago

So it sounds as if nobody cares what the "gate keepers" think, but part of my question was, is purity important to them?
Is it generally a quality that they look for when establishing their mark of significance?

There's an obvious hierarchy of perceived medium value...
Oils are more valuable than acrylics
Acrylics are more valuable than watercolors
Paintings in general are more valuable than drawings.

Would the Mona Lisa be as renowned if it was done partially in colored pencil?

Joe Burgess
J.B. Imagery

 

Brian Wallace

8 Years Ago

It's the artwork itself, not the medium. The Mona Lisa would have been no less a masterpiece if had been originated in colored pencil don't you think. BTW, there are many pencil pieces by Leonardo da Vinci that are renowned not for the medium in which they were done, but for the genius behind the art.

 

Alfred Ng

8 Years Ago

Yes, call me a purist or traditionalist: I was taught watercolor by two great teachers. Right from the beginning I was taught from the proper way to prepare my paper, use only transparent color and never use white paint on my painting. (For the purist watercolor painter, white or highlights are from the paper. I don’t use any resist to save my white either) those of the lessons I still follow which has become second nature to me.

 

Joel Bruce Wallach

8 Years Ago

@Joe
"So it sounds as if nobody cares what the "gate keepers" think, but part of my question was, is purity important to them?
Is it generally a quality that they look for when establishing their mark of significance?"

Joe, purity as you describe it was important to critics perhaps two centuries ago. In the 1800's, the French Academy had such concerns. Now, however, the art critics and scholars think differently. They regard Andy Warhol as an important modern artist of significance, for example. Look at whether he fits the picture of purity you're concerned aboutÉ

- Andy Warhol made silkscreen prints, not oil paintings.
- Andy Warhol made modified copies of popular culture artifacts and product labels.
- Andy Warhol didn't even do much of the work himself. His studio staff did the work.

Critics also consider as significant many kinds of experimental and conceptual art that you wouldn't even regard as real art. If you're concerned about what critics may regard as significant, you'll produce art that doesn't come from your heart and soul. And likely as not, the critics won't appreciate it, anyway.

Better to bring your attention to what you yourself consider as pure art, and make the best art you can. Then you'll be working to please the most important critic, who is your own self. And, you'll be pleasing your fans, who want the art that is genuinely yours.

 

R Allen Swezey

8 Years Ago

Alfred,

To me your beautiful work defines the word "Purity"

To master, as you do, with Watercolor requires "Purity"

Of all the visual media Watercolor requires the most discipline.

Pure color, Pure White, Paper, Pure Water, and a Pure Confident Brush Stroke.

 

Bill Tomsa

8 Years Ago

No.

No.

Maybe.

Probably not.

Bill Tomsa

http;//billtomsa.blogspot.com/

 

Tony Murray

8 Years Ago

It comes down to whether you want to define your own art and path or let others do it for you. When it comes to my own work I am definitely a purist in terms of methodology and medium. But an outside observer might disagree. There is a great temptation to take the path of least resistance.

 

David Bridburg

8 Years Ago

I make mixed media works by definition.

I understand how Alfred would be seen as a purist.

But I am uncertain that pure is at the heart of the matter.

Alfred's aesthetics are beautiful, and beautifully done. Purity really is not the issue.

Ivory soap is 99.9% pure, purely advertized.

Joe you are too close into your own art. I find that to be the relationship of a child, the art, to the parent, me.
You are deciding if there is too much pudding on the facades. What is the saying? "Only a mother could love
that face"?

Then you are asking about Gatekeepers. I have applied recently to two museums. Trying doing the same. Why not?
There is plenty of pudding on my images. But I will never know what others see. In large part because "others" are not
some monolithic being. While the word Gatekeepers is plural the usage is singular and being used wrongly. JMO

Marketing your work means letting people see it repetitively. If at those two museums I applied to each group of decision makers
take some time and then rinse and repeat, which they might or might not, then if they look more than once......I have a much better shot.
JMO....because I dont really know.

Take out the word marketing and replace it with showing your work. Pudding on the facade imagined or not.

Dave

 

David Bridburg

8 Years Ago

Joe,

Picasso dumped pure. He dumped classicism. He used weight in his early paintings to make the human
figure a bit more clutsy. He added human.


 

Cheri Stollings

8 Years Ago

My work is such a hodgepodge of things I have a hard time putting it in a category. To me art is whatever tells a story and draws a reaction from the viewer.

 

Drew

8 Years Ago

real photgraphers only do black and white using the gelatin silver process.

:-P

 

David Bridburg

8 Years Ago

Drew,

I knew there was a reason I always hated "real photographers".

If my coordinates are off just a tad I say my art was done by someone else.

Very seriously.

Dave

 

Drew

8 Years Ago

other than digital hybids, its been 35years sence i did mixed media and it was mostly pencil with a little pastel and white out for highlights.
i think ive done a total of 2 in my whole life.

 

Roger Swezey

8 Years Ago

There are some that believe that I take crap and just put a frame around it

Art Prints

 

Joe Burgess

8 Years Ago

That's pure crap, Roger.

Joe Burgess
J.B. Imagery

 

Vincent Von Frese

8 Years Ago

Roger,

Your statement about crap with a frame around it reminded me of this;

There was an old horse rancher in Arkansas who commissioned me for an oil painting of some of his quarter horses. I was able to do it my way.
He showed me his "work of art". It was some horse manure he had glued to a nice plaque after spray painting the manure with gold paint.
He had it on his kitchen wall and a title of "Family Jewels". It was original I can say that for him!

Vincent Von

 

Jani Freimann

8 Years Ago

Regarding R Allen comment:
"To master, as you do, with Watercolor requires "Purity"

Of all the visual media Watercolor requires the most discipline.

Pure color, Pure White, Paper, Pure Water, and a Pure Confident Brush Stroke."

..............

Yes, Alfred's work is amazing and he is does watercolor in it's purest form, but mastering watercolor does not require "purity" - transparency or saving the white of the paper for your whites.
Pure color (not muddied), pure water and pure confident brush strokes, yes. You can use white (and Paynes grey instead of making your own black) and still be a master of watercolor. It's a matter of taste and how one is taught. Most watercolor artists were taught the traditional way of doing watercolor. I personally moved away from it because the traditional way was not enough.
It was a great foundation to work from to create my own style in watercolor. When I made it opaque and used too much water, causing blooms and drips, I saw a beauty in it and decided that they needed to be there. I didn't see them as a mistake and then try to train myself to not do them even though my teachers said they were mistakes. Those drips and blooms set me apart and were unique to me. My thought was, it's texture and I like texture and I'm going to make them work and over time it did.
They key to mastering watercolor is not to do it in it's purest form, but to make it work for you.

The job of an artist is not necessarily doing art in it's purest form, but to use a medium or media to express who they are as an artist and to tweak it to fit their personality and master that. If an artist wants to be a purist with their choice of media then they should absolutely do that and do it with gusto.

(Moved the last half of my comment to a new post)

 

Drew

8 Years Ago

"Of all the visual media Watercolor requires the most discipline. "

rather absolute and false statement.

 

Jani Freimann

8 Years Ago

I agree, Drew.

I am discovering that it is more important to be consistent than to be a purist about a media. Quality comes from practicing a style. Mastering a style not mastering purity that was defined 100's of years ago. The mark of significance is consistency of style, color, and subject not how well you stick to the purity of a media.

If your work isn't accepted into a high end gallery or a museum and your work is good or great, look at your consistency. Chances are, if they say your work is nice but say no, they don't feel confident that you are consistent and a master of what you do. They need to be able to gain a collector base and make money off you. That's how they pay their bills and feed their families.
Besides them needing to like your work so they are a good advocate for you, can a gallery count on you to produce more work in that same vein and can you bring them consistent product consistently? That's the question.

 

Joel Bruce Wallach

8 Years Ago

Jani, that's very well stated. You've brought the issue of purity back where it belongs-- to a definition of pure, consistent expression and style that comes from within, rather than being defined as a rigid adherence to an outer style or medium.

 

Roger Swezey

8 Years Ago

An interesting article:.".White Watercolor Paint ?? What? Why? When?"

http://brushstrokesbykc.blogspot.com/2010/09/white-watercolor-paint-what-why-when.html

It covers both sides of the argument

 

Jani Freimann

8 Years Ago

Thank you, Joel.

Roger, I agree with the article. Except for the part about using white to tint makes the colors muddy. I don't agree. What makes mud is over mixing in the pallet. If you let the colors mix on the paper than you won't get "mud".

I did this painting, Painted By The Wind, using white paint. This has about twenty layers of white paint because permanent white is very transparent even though it says it's not. The colors in the horse came from the white and blue paint mixing with the already dry red underpainting. The red lifted and mixed with the red and blue.
Remember I use a lot of water. If I applied the paint with less water, I would not get the same result. Each layer is dried before applying another; which is important to keep the colors from turning to mud.
I could not have achieved this look any other way. Most people think I used a different media, but this was done with only watercolor paint.

Art Prints

 

David Bridburg

8 Years Ago

One of my most beautiful works took only twenty minutes. A very simple touch of red.

This work was full of new workflows I had never used before and took me five weeks.

Sell Art Online

 

Lisa Kaiser

8 Years Ago

I really don't have a lot to offer this very interesting thread other than I have a water color studio, an oil and acrylic studio and my home has murals in latex all over. I'm a purist in whatever medium I'm working in except for acrylic. I like to mix acrylic and oil because the oil gives my acrylic work more intense color and I'm clueless as to why. When I do an oil painting, however, I stick to oils only. The different kinds of painting really require an understanding of each medium because the techniques that one uses in each are completely different.

What makes art valuable? This is one of the oddest questions...just because people love your art does not make it valuable. One has to have their work assessed I think, BUT the questions are very interesting.

 

David Bridburg

8 Years Ago

Lisa,

I specialized to some degree in Art History and Concepts. I think priceless art adds to
the culture. To the stream of the history of the culture.

That though is going to change very abruptly because of 3D printing. The more in demand copies
are the more a work of art will be worth. So far the pet rock is winning that battle.

Dave

 

Joe Burgess

8 Years Ago

I don't think it's about "pettiness" and "snobbish attitudes" as some here have suggested, so much as it's about skill and craftsmanship.
A sculpture carved from one solid piece of wood is obviously more impressive than the same sculpture being glued together in pieces.

Knowing that each medium has its individual pros and cons, isn't there some logic to the idea that completion with a single medium shows the artist's mastery of that medium, and their ability to address its shortcomings?

Joe Burgess
J.B. Imagery

 

Joel Bruce Wallach

8 Years Ago

Joe,

The artist's ability to complete their work within a particular medium certainly does show their skill.

Each medium has its standards, and it is the artist's task to reach ever higher levels of excellence within the medium used for that piece of art.

You used the example of a wood sculptor utilizing bits of wood, as compared to a wood sculptor carving from a single piece of wood.
Each of these sculpting methods is a separate medium. It may seem that one requires more skill than the other, but they are two unique skill sets, not to be confused with each other.
Each type of sculptor can attain excellence in their medium, because the skill set for carving from a block of wood is different for the skill in combining pieces of wood.

If we agree that each medium has its unique standards, this addresses your initial presenting question about how future art scholars might perceive contemporary artists.
Future scholars will look at whether the artist...

1. Has a consistent body of work,
2. from a unique point of view,
3. presented in an innovative style,
4. and consistently demonstrating the highest standard of excellence for their particular medium.

It won't be an issue of what the medium is, but whether these four points have been fulfilled. And these four points can be expressed through any contemporary mixed media, or through any traditionally defined medium. Or even, through any methods that have yet to be discovered.

 

Joe Burgess

8 Years Ago

Great response, Joel.
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to reply so clearly.

My question stems from a concern of approaching the galleries and museums with work that the curators might instantly find to be inferior based upon the methods employed.
It seems they hold oil paintings in the highest regard.
I sometimes wonder if a description like, "acrylic, charcoal, colored pencil and glitter on canvas" just sounds ridiculous, but I suppose that's where the term "mixed media" comes into play.

Thanks again

Joe Burgess
J.B. Imagery

 

Robert Kernodle

8 Years Ago

I am only a purist in the sense that I require intermingling media to have structural stability with respect to one another. Beyond this, I just consider the materials part of an extended palette.

For example, I would NOT place oil under acrylics, or I would NOT use an acid based marker on top of acrylics. This assumes that these actual substrate combinations would be the finished art object, of course.

On the other hand, if I were photographing the effects of a chemical reaction between conflicting materials, such as between liquid oil paint and liquid acrylic paint, then none of this would matter, because the conflict would be part of the desired effect in producing the PHOTGRAPHIC image. My FLUIDISM photography REQUIRES a destructive conflict between fluid media. This sort of destructive chemical conflict can produce some awesome spontaneous designs, in this instance.

If one medium is more fugitive than another, then I would be reluctant to combine them. Acrylic seems more lasting than pastel or graphite, and so I would tend to shy away from combining them to any great degree, but, then again, it all depends on how you seal the layers. If you use pencil on top of acrylic, and you can seal this layer with a clear varnish without smearing the pencil, then this would work - I have done this, in fact.

The real issue is the intelligent technical use of materials in combination, rather than the purity of using any one material alone.

 

Joel Bruce Wallach

8 Years Ago

Joe,

Which curators are being referred to here? Curators of modern art are familiar with mixed media, assemblage art, sculpture of varied materials, video conceptual art, and plastic materials of all kinds.

Are you imagining that they'll go from appreciating an Ed Kienholz assemblage piece, to an Andy Warhol pop art silkscreen, to your work, and they'll throw up their hands because you used mixed media? You're inventing an issue that may not exist. Instead of fearing ridicule, develop a way of describing your chosen materials that is coherent and meaningful.

Your job is to be consistent, or "pure" if you like, to your unique vision. That requires the previously mentioned principles, so that you can demonstrate:

1. A consistent body of work,
2. from a unique point of view,
3. presented in an innovative style,
4. and consistently demonstrating the highest standard of excellence for your chosen medium(s).

Robert Kernodle describes the issue precisely: "Éintelligent technical use of materials in combination, rather than the purity of using any one material alone."

 

Sarah Kersey

8 Years Ago

An example of mixed media would be some of the meticulously detailed paintings of birds, where the background is airbrushed with acrylic, the majority of the bird, leaves, tree limbs, etc. are developed with watercolor, and the final touch is the use of colored pencil or acrylic to develop the detail. Also, there are artists who do an underpainting in watercolor with further refinement using pastel, ink, charcoal, or acrylic.

I suppose I would be considered a purist when it comes to oil painting, as I use only one brand of paint: Old Holland Oil Paints.

 

Joe Burgess

8 Years Ago

Well, Joel, I like to ask questions, especially ones that make people squirm.
If I hear about something I'm not familiar with, I try to learn more about it.
The purist concept is not something I imagined or invented. It is a very real mentality that some carry within the arts.

Again, I appreciate your feedback.

Joe Burgess
J.B. Imagery

 

Joel Bruce Wallach

8 Years Ago

Joe,

"The purist concept is not something I imagined or invented. It is a very real mentality that some carry within the arts. "

Note the word SomeÉ yes there are some people having that mentality, but don't get stuck in trying to appeal to their limitations.

Stick to your chosen mediums, and focus on upgrading your skill within that realm.

No comparisons, and no excuses -- just present who you are, in the way you've chosen.

As an artist, you are a trailblazer and seer, revealing a deeper understanding about reality. And that includes presenting your work with the assurance that you are consciously choosing your materials, style, and manner of presentation.

 

Karl Reich

8 Years Ago

This is a really great topic. I am wondering were purisim merges with minimalism. I will take butter over Margarine any day, and cold pressed olive oil on my salad rather than a vaccuum packed, shelf stabilized plastic bottle of chemicals and preservatives, and plain black coffee or a pure shot of esspresso over a caffine beverage injected with sugar and third world chocalate, swirlled with whipped cream and candy sprinkles. I prefer real paper back books, brick and mortar bookstores and music on vinyl disks rather than digital downloads. I want my whiskey straight, no soda pop or fake flavors, and women who can stand up straight without make up; pure, natural and confident. And pigments mixed only with linseed oil. --- Okay, I'll fall for Ginger one night, but I'd rather live with Mary-Anne happily ever after.

I live a very austere, minimal life. But the level of detail in my paintings is far from minimal, except for the medium of choice, which is oils, or acrylics.. I am a purist in that regard. It seems to me that my relatively uncomplicated life style gives me the freedom and patience to focus on the more minute and complex details of my paintings. So does a complex, detailed painting evolved from a very minimal perspective make it a piece of minimal art? As far as the medium is concerned, certainly, I am a purist. But a minimalist?

As far as what I believe constitutes purism in art ---- well, right now, in today's day and age, there is still nothing that compares to a painting done by hand eye cooridantion, with a tangibly plastic medium, etc. But that is not to say that years from now, from an historical perspective, that digital art and the likes wont be taken seriously. There's a lot of really good digital art out there right now, and it is prolific, there is little doubt in my mind that the art historians of the future will recognize it as a hallmark of the 21st century.





.

 

This discussion is closed.